turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Liberal Party (UK)
This page and Conservative Party should be moved to "Liberal Party (UK)" and "Conservative Party (UK)," respectively. There are Liberal Parties in Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Gibraltar, Greece, Honduras, Hong Kong, Iceland, Italy, Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Norway, the Philippines, Rwanda, Serbia, Sri Lanka, Ukraine, and Uruguay, plus an American party that operates only in New York and a pretty unimportant rump party in the UK descending from Liberals who refused to merge with the Social Democrats in 1988. There are Conservatives in Armenia, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czech, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Georgia, Iceland, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Romania, South Africa, Uganda, and the UK, plus four unrelated US parties which operate independently of one another in New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, and Virginia. Canadian Politicians :I was thinking that as well as I was moving parties around. Since we don't have anyother parties by that name, moving didn't seem that urgent. But, I suppose now is as good a time as any. TR 19:22, March 24, 2011 (UTC) ::Dare I suggest that there's a pretty good chance the Canadian parties will feature in Supervolcano? Turtle Fan 19:38, March 24, 2011 (UTC) :::Dare! It would be nice to have more Canadian politicians that just Robert Borden. TR 19:56, March 24, 2011 (UTC) ::::Wouldn't it just! A "Canadian Prime Ministers" category would be extra-special, of course. Turtle Fan 01:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC) :::::Wouldn't that be nice! ::::It occured to me that HT might pull his common trick of saying "the unnamed PM of Canada said ______". But after reviewing geography, I see Regina and possibly Winnipeg would be impacted right out the gate. Also, both Canada and Mexico (which would also be impacted, although I think more indirectly) would be in the position to render aid, etc. So I think it likely that we will get a somewhat developed PM and probably President of Mexico. TR 00:16, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::We can hope. Manitoba and Alberta would certainly be affected. Assuming there's a huge ash cloud, Ontario would be in trouble, too. And of course Canada would be losing a huge market for its exports. I believe BC would be hardest hit by that? :::::::Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta certainly and ash clouds into Ontario and Quebec. Looking at a map, Yellowstone is almost due south of the Alberta/Sask. border so BC would be upwind and not affected so much unless the eruption also triggers earthquakes along the West coast. ML4E 16:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Of course, there are a lot of things HT could obviously have done with books in the past, that he hasn't bothered touching. How did MwIH affect early Cold War fault lines like Greece and Korea? Turtle Fan 04:08, March 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::If there is mention of either party, I suggest the article(s) be called Liberal/Conservative Party of Canada rather than put Canada in brackets as was done with UK. Those happen to be their official names, partly to distinguish them from the original UK parties and partially to distinguish them from their respective, semi-independent provincial counterparts. ::::::Works for me. TR 00:16, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Me too. Turtle Fan 04:08, March 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::Incidentally, Harper's government was defeated today in a non-confidence motion and we'll have national elections the beginning of May (either 2nd or 9th, the date not set until the writ is dropped). I would be amused if HT has the supervolcano erupt March 25, 2011 :-p ML4E 22:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC) ::::I won't be amused. I'll quickly put the book down, and contact my Catholic friends about recommending a good exorcist before I pick it back up again. :::::My thought was that HT would have a vague date in the near future in his draft manuscript and then change it to March 25 before sending it to the printers as a twee shout-out to his Canadian readers. However, I really think that it will be set a few years after the publishing date so around 2014/15. On the other hand, it seems HT is interested in the effects on modern society in general and, not wanting to get involved directly in current US politics, set it 10 years into the future, say 2020 or so. ML4E 16:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::If you'd like to share your opinions about the vote and upcoming elections, ML4E, I am curious. If not, don't feel pressured. TR 00:16, March 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::At the moment I am unsure as I was of the opinion that one of the opposition parties would back down and the minority government would muddle along since the Conservatives are ahead at the polls. Most commentators think that the election won't change things much, that it will be another minority Conservative government but the snap opinion polls just after the non-confidence vote suggest they may get a slight majority. ML4E 16:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::Just yesterday, when I was looking up the above lists, I read the little blurb on the Conservative Party of Canada and thought Hmm, he's been in office pretty long for the head of a minority government. Turtle Fan 04:08, March 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::There was an election two and a half years ago where the Conservatives gained a few seats so it technically is two governments, both Conservative. A lifespan of 2-3 years is typical for minority governments so this isn't as surprising as it might first seem. This is one reason that some are suggesting a majority Conservative government, that voters are getting tired of the shenanigans of a minority parliament, the posturing and going to the polls every couple of years. ML4E 16:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) ::::::I can see where a minority government would get tiresome. I guess the nearest equivalent in US politics would be divided government, with one party in the White House and the other in the Capitol, like we have now. (Well, technically we've only got half of that, but between low Democratic morale throughout the Hill and McConnell's insistence on filibustering everything this side of a motion to adjourn, we might as well.) ::::::Any possibility of the Bloc and the NDP taking a page from the Nick Clegg playbook and entering a coalition with the Liberals? I know they'd never enter a coalition with the Conservatives, though that point would be moot if the Conservatives do indeed win a majority. Turtle Fan 21:52, March 26, 2011 (UTC) :::::Harper is using this as some sort of scary, undemocratic conspiracy even though he talked about the same thing in an attempt to bring down the Paul Martin minority government. For some strange reason this is gaining some traction among voters. ML4E 19:45, March 27, 2011 (UTC) ::::::A party leader is changing his tune based on what is in his party's short term advantage? I'm apalled!! ::::::By the way, when was the last majority government? Chretien? Turtle Fan 20:14, March 27, 2011 (UTC) :::::That's right. Martin served as PM for the last year or so under Chretien's mandate much the same way Brown did with Blair's and then called an election. Unlike Brown, the Liberals had the most seats in the minority parliament so Martin remained PM. This was when Harper tried to form his own coalition. Martin's government lasted about a year and then was defeated on a non-confidence vote. The election resulted with the Conservatives with the most seats and Martin announced his resignation as PM election night. :::::About a year and a half later, Harper called a snap election even though he had not lost a confidence vote and had passed legislation setting fixed elections every four years. It resulted in another minority government with the Conservatives gaining about 10 seats. Dion, Martin's successor as Liberal leader did not challenge the Conservatives continuing to govern but when the budget was introduced a month later he did. He came up with a coalition with the NDP and an agreement from the Bloc to support the new government (but not be formally part of it) and stated he would visit the G-G to offer to form a new government as soon as the Conservatives lost a non-confidence motion he would introduce ASAP. :::::Harper flipped out, calling it an attempted coup against the will of the people, blah, blah blah. However, the public bought it and the support for the Liberals plummeted. This was probably because they needed the support of the separatist Bloc to be viable which disgusted people even though the previous Conservative government survived because the Bloc sided with them on several confidence votes. This boogeyman seems to still exist, at least Harper's has been going on about coalitions for the first two days of election campaigning. ML4E 04:20, March 28, 2011 (UTC) Post-Election Debrief Somehow I wasn't able to look up the blog you're doing, ML4E, but Election Day is this week, isn't it? Turtle Fan 01:22, May 5, 2011 (UTC) :Since I hadn't done anything with it you didn't miss anything. Yes, the election was Monday, May 2 with the Conservatives winning a slight but solid majority and the NDP forming the official opposition. The results were (2011/2008): :Con. 167/143 :Lib. 034/77 :NDP 102/30 :Bloc. 004/48 :Ind. nil/4 :And, for the first time, one seat for the Green Party. The collapse of the Liberals was surprising and the collapse of the Bloc shocking. The polls going into the election showed a surge for the NDP but no one predicted this. I guess that's why they hold elections ;-) ML4E 17:43, May 5, 2011 (UTC) ::Wow! That's quite a gain for the NDP. But I guess the Conservatives have a majority now? Looks like the no-confidence vote badly backfired on the Liberals; I don't follow Canadian politics all that closely but I never would have thought they'd be a distant third. Turtle Fan 18:45, May 5, 2011 (UTC) :That's right, they needed 155 seats for a majority so the Conservatives are solidly in control. The polls in the last week of the campaign indicated a surging NDP and declining Liberal and Block but no one predicted these results. There was some speculation that the NDP would get more seats than the Liberals and that if a coalition formed Jack Layton, the NDP leader, might head it but not a complete collapse that actually happened. Likewise with the Bloc, some predicted their seat total might be cut in half but not the near total wipe out that actually occurred. ML4E 16:48, May 7, 2011 (UTC) ::Got any theories as to what went wrong/right, depending on a person's affiliation? Turtle Fan 00:32, May 8, 2011 (UTC) :::The general consensus is that Layton did well in the two leaders debates (one in English, the other in French). Ignatieff (leader of the Liberals) was wooden and the Conservatives had painted him as out for himself in attack ads from before the election while Layton was the most relaxed and homey, the guy you'd want to have a beer with. So for English Canada the anti-Harper vote moved to the NDP. Quebec is the most left leaning province in Canada but the Independence question has dominated the debate for years. (I just realized it came to the fore in the 1960s so its been the main issue for half a century!) The Liberals were the prominent federalists so elections were between them and the separatists. Last election Quebec voters flirted with the Conservatives but were turned off by some of their policies over the last parliament and so seemed to turn to the NDP instead. Likewise the mildly separatists seemed to have finally had enough of the issue for the moment and abandoned the Bloc for the NDP too. ML4E 19:27, May 8, 2011 (UTC) ::::I saw one clip of the leaders and I also had that impression of Layton. A shame people let that sway their votes; if you're worried that a given PM/President/whatever is going to be unpleasant socially when compared with his opponents, never fear: The people who worry about these things generally don't get invited to state dinners. Turtle Fan 23:34, May 8, 2011 (UTC) By the way, looking at the logo the Libs were using when they merged with the SDP, I can't help but think of a road sign. It certainly makes a compelling case, though, for people who might have forgotten the party's name. Turtle Fan 01:22, May 5, 2011 (UTC) GW talk Also, I don't recall anyone saying that the Liberals were in Government during GWI. I do recall that we used to have an article saying Lloyd George had been PM at that time, and we eventually deemed it to have insufficient basis in canon and deleted it. Turtle Fan 19:16, March 24, 2011 (UTC) :Probably something left over from the Lloyd George days. TR 19:22, March 24, 2011 (UTC) ::Should probably do a quick once-over on Amazon before we remove it. I'll check later tonight. I'm in a pretty lazy mood at the moment, I guess looking up all those Conservative and Liberal parties took a lot out of me. Turtle Fan 19:38, March 24, 2011 (UTC) :::Don't worry, I just did the once over. Nothing. TR 19:56, March 24, 2011 (UTC) ::::All right, then. Out it comes. Turtle Fan 01:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC)